Literature DB >> 7885260

Cross-linguistic comparisons in the integration of visual and auditory speech.

D W Massaro1, M M Cohen, P M Smeele.   

Abstract

We examined how speakers of different languages perceive speech in face-to-face communication. These speakers identified synthetic unimodal and bimodal speech syllables made from synthetic auditory and visual five-step /ba/-/da/ continua. In the first experiment, Dutch speakers identified the test syllables as either /ba/ or /da/. To explore the robustness of the results, Dutch and English speakers were given a completely open-ended response task. Tasks in previous studies had always specified a set of alternatives. Similar results were found in the two-alternative and open-ended task. Identification of the speech segments was influenced by both the auditory and the visual sources of information. The results falsified an auditory dominance model (ADM) which assumes that the contribution of visible speech is dependent on poor-quality audible speech. The results also falsified an additive model of perception (AMP) in which the auditory and visual sources are linearly combined. The fuzzy logical model of perception (FLMP) provided a good description of performance, supporting the claim that multiple sources of continuous information are evaluated and integrated in speech perception. These results replicate previous results found with English, Spanish, and Japanese speakers. Although there were significant performance differences, the model analyses indicated no differences in the nature of information processing across language groups. The performance differences across languages were caused by information differences due to different phonologies in Dutch and English. These results suggest that the underlying mechanisms for speech perception are similar across languages.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7885260     DOI: 10.3758/bf03210561

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  14 in total

1.  Selectivity, scope, and simplicity of models: a lesson from fitting judgments of perceived depth.

Authors:  J E Cutting; N Bruno; N P Brady; C Moore
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1992-09

2.  Hearing lips and seeing voices.

Authors:  H McGurk; J MacDonald
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1976 Dec 23-30       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 3.  Models of integration given multiple sources of information.

Authors:  D W Massaro; D Friedman
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Testing between the TRACE model and the fuzzy logical model of speech perception.

Authors:  D W Massaro
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Before you see it, you see its parts: evidence for feature encoding and integration in preschool children and adults.

Authors:  L A Thompson; D W Massaro
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Use of visual information for phonetic perception.

Authors:  Q Summerfield
Journal:  Phonetica       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 1.759

7.  The role of visual information in the processing of place and manner features in speech perception.

Authors:  K P Green; P K Kuhl
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1989-01

8.  The paradigm and the fuzzy logical model of perception are alive and well.

Authors:  D W Massaro; M M Cohen
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1993-03

9.  Speechreading supplemented with frequency-selective sound-pressure information.

Authors:  M Breeuwer; R Plomp
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Hearing by eye.

Authors:  R Campbell; B Dodd
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol       Date:  1980-02       Impact factor: 2.143

View more
  5 in total

1.  Bayes factor of model selection validates FLMP.

Authors:  D W Massaro; M M Cohen; C S Campbell; T Rodriguez
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-03

2.  Seeing pitch: visual information for lexical tones of Mandarin-Chinese.

Authors:  Trevor H Chen; Dominic W Massaro
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Perceiving speech from inverted faces.

Authors:  D W Massaro; M M Cohen
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1996-10

4.  Perceptual recognition of facial affect: cross-cultural comparisons.

Authors:  D W Massaro; J W Ellison
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1996-11

5.  Rethinking the Mechanisms Underlying the McGurk Illusion.

Authors:  Mariel G Gonzales; Kristina C Backer; Brenna Mandujano; Antoine J Shahin
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 3.473

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.